Motu or Apollo X?

You'll want to use the x16 as your main interface for its superior D/A and clocking. It'll feed your Mons, Alt Mons, and Cues. 

As you are not running the SF as the master, I think it’s headphones would only hear its inputs.

But, you can mirror your 2 bus out in settings to say spdif and send that to the SF, so you’d hear it for tracking or a que mix for the SF.

Was that your concern ?

Thanks Drew.

Man, I’ve been thinking hard of switching from my Motu 16a/828ES combo to either an Apollo X6/X16 combo (both of which I can get for a KILLER price). I just don’t see myself using unisum pre’s or printing with plugins because I have so much HW. I would love to monitor with fx though.

Or go all in with Lynx (n).

Or stay with my Motu 828es/16a combo. I presently monitor through a Dangerous Convert-2.

If will not use unison on front end for tracking then as stated above , you are paying for features with Apollo you will not use: why ?

If Luna is the draw, then you must have an Apollo for Luna to work , but remember then every mix is tethered to having an Apollo for ever: is that what you want ?

I got that MOTU fever! Apollo gave me chicken pocks! Think slowly and take a nap before you jump.

Perfect response, that should answer the OP perfectly.

If I had to guess, if there were a poll, MOTU and APOLLO would be the top two most common RGO interfaces, from what I've gathered.  Kind of interesting.

When you say ‘invested in the UA ecosystem’, do you mean own a lot of UAD plugins? I “own” a lot of UAD plugins (that I can’t sell), running on a TB satellite. That was one of the draws for me to an Apollo. So, I guess I’m invested. BUT, I wouldn’t use unison preamps. I already have some really GREAT preamps. AND I wouldn’t track through plugins. I don’t see the point, aside from saving DSP. I already have GREAT HW and GREAT native plugins, and a ton of CPU on a new iMac. So I don’t need the extra processing power.

So then what’s left? Luna? Meh. I feel like that’s another money pit with all the extra in-app purchases they want you to buy. Don’t get me wrong. They sound great and I’d probably buy them.

I also feel Apollo’s are headed for a closed ecosystem. Wasn’t their an issue in the last UAD update that caused errors in latency reporting to Pro Tools? I feel like the response was “well, Pro Tools doesn’t accurately calculate ADC with non-Avid interfaces, so not our problem. But it works with our DAW!”

But even after all of that, I’m still drawn to the X. Seems everywhere I look, people have Apollo’s in their racks.

I have both here right now, and I’d agree with that, more or less. I’d say Apollo has the nicer build quality. It’s one of the things I’m drawn to about it. The switches are chunky, the knobs are solid, the metal work has got heft. The Motu just feels cheaper in comparison and I hate that.

But, Apollo’s are more expensive, so I’d expect that.

As for sound quality, after blind A/B’ing the loop back recordings, they are really close. I mean, the difference in all of these converters is subtle. But it could also be that my ears aren’t trained enough to appreciate the differences. One persons subtle is another’s huge. I could reliably and consistently pick out the Apollo, though. It is a little more forward sounding in the upper midrange. It makes vocals seem more forward. I could see how some might find that fatiguing, or how some might consider that as more detailed. I didn’t find the sense of depth or separation noticeably different. I actually like the sound of the Apollo. It sounds exciting to me. There’s energy in that mid push.

And I would LOVE the ability to monitor UAD reverb while vocal tracking. Or a bass amp sim while tracking bass.

In the end, the move to an Apollo, especially an X6 only, would only make sense if I were to shed HW and commit to working mainly ITB. And I have to admit, the idea sounds rather enticing to not have to deal with patch bays, troubleshooting, HW maintenance, etc.

What you mean like pro tools HDX with AAX / DSP? At least the barrier to entry is far less, I mean you can use it like every other DAW so? Issue with Luna is primarily the early stage of development AFAIK. If they want to have their pro tools share and give it out for free (as opposed to a sub on top of buying everything else) let them. I'd happily buy a summing plug once in a blue moon just to avoid the sub..

Having a true integrated alternative is an interesting concept and not unwelcome. As for the interfaces, well pretty much none of my interfaces correctly worked with Pro Tools native (in terms of latency) besides the Mbox Pro. It's one of the reasons I don't use it anymore. I think it comes down to how much UA listen to their customers regarding development, I'm not the early adopter type though so I'll stick with Logic until next year or something. Although, summing plugs / channel strips are fine but if they start feature walling core components that the front running DAW's contain then I'd give it a hard pass.

Also, yes plugs are definitely another entry into the UAD ecosystem especially as it's DSP that can only be run on their platform.

Did you grab the one on reverb the other day for 750? I should have jumped quicker, but missed my chance.